March Madness: Rounds 1 and 2 recap
Chalk, clutch shots, blowouts, the ACC and S16 preview
The four-day marathon to kick off March Madness has concluded, and I surprised myself by never reaching the eyes-bleeding, brain-melting, “do I even want to watch more basketball?” point1. There were a few other surprises (Kentucky, the ACC), and some non-surprises (chalk). Here are my prevailing themes from rounds 1 and 2:
Chalk: All of the top eight teams, 10 of the top 12, and 12 of the top 16
Clutch shots: Buzzer beaters, game winners, game clinchers. The shot making was unreal
Blowouts: Too many snoozers, but I expect the strong Sweet 16 field makes for a competitive round
ACC: Four teams in the Sweet 16, not bad for a “down” year
Accolades: No, not Gohlke
Plus, get my quick Sweet 16 preview at the end.
Chalk: Top teams were not so vulnerable
This Sweet 16 might boast the most top-to-bottom pedigree and accomplishment of any recent tournament. As mentioned above, all of the top eight seeds, 10 of the top 12, and 12 of the top 16 advanced. The two “mid-majors” are perennial power Gonzaga and last year’s Final Four participant San Diego State. The lowest seeds are a team that started 9-0 and rose as high as 13 in the polls (Clemson) and a Power 6 school with multiple national championships (NC State).
In my bracket preview2, I noted that I expect a chalky tournament. Tennessee, UNC, and Houston were all coming off bad conference tournament losses, and the top seeds have had a mix of dominance and near-misses (Tennessee and Houston). While we had a near-record of double digit seed wins (8), the double-digit success didn’t sustain. Only NC State (11) made it to the Sweet 16, compared to past years when as many as four double-digit seeds have played to the second weekend.
A few of the surging teams (Auburn and Wisconsin) bowed out in the first round, and the trendy upstarts of James Madison and Grand Canyon couldn’t get over the hump.
Clutch shots: Some holy sh*t moments
Chalk and blowouts usually make for a boring tournament, but the first rounds had their fair share of notable, we’ll-look-back-on-YouTube-in-5-years moments. KJ Simpson, Walter Clayton Jr., Brooks Barnhizer, Baylor Scheierman and Andersson Garcia all displayed the clutch gene. It’s a fair critique to say that college talent and shot making can’t sniff the NBA, but all those dudes added to moments that made it feel there were more clutch makes than clutch misses3.
Blowouts: We nearly had three 40-point wins in R2
You expect some duds in the first round when an overmatched mid-major plays a P6 team. But the second round included three 15+ point margins, a 20+ point margin and three 35+ point margins, and several of those were between P6 schools. Yikes.
I expect the strong Sweet 16 field to have competitive and memorable games [read my quick S16 preview below].
ACC: Not bad for a “down” year
On his podcast, Mark Titus said that teams — not conferences — win NCAA tournament games. As much as I want to agree, as an ACC-centric blog, I’m duty-bound to fly the flag. With four Sweet 16 teams, the ACC has more than any conference, including the 8-bid conferences (SEC and Big 12). The ACC is 8-1, and I personally disavow UVA’s bid, having much preferred a Big East team or Indiana St.
It’s easy to “well, actually” some of the ACC success, especially with NC State’s and Duke’s weaker second round opponents. But that’s part of the madness, and the ACC having two head-to-head wins against the Big 12 — the presumptive top conference and new ESPN darling — adds to the joy
In a future post, I’ll explore (in too much detail) the vibes of ACC basketball, but it’s cathartic to flex on the haters.
Accolades: No, not Gohlke
Jack Gohlke had the defining, memorable, unexpected performance of the tournament with his leg-flinging, heat-checking TEN three-pointer game against UK. While his second game against State was admirable (22 pts, 6-17 3FG) in an OT loss, Oregon’s Jermaine Couisnard had the more complete body of work. He scored 72 points (including a 40 burger) and tag-teamed with N’Faly Dante to will his team in a 2OT loss to Creighton. Couisnard is my player of the tournament so far, and that Creighton-Oregon game is the game of the tourney so far. But there’s plenty of basketball left to play, which bring us to….
Sweet 16 Preview
I’ll write more complete game-by-game previews for the four ACC teams, but here are my main thoughts for each region.
East: UConn’s “bracket of death” has (unsurprisingly, as I noted in my bracket preview) turned into a tough but not atypical path to the Final Four. Of the five giant killers in their bracket, they’ll only play San Diego St and the winner of Illinois-Iowa St. That’s undoubtedly a tough path, but no tougher than any of the remaining 1 seeds. Plus, the Huskies look absolutely dominant, so I expect them to come out of the region.
West: The specter of the Caleb Love vs UNC reunion looms over the entire region…and even as a UNC fan, I’m sorta rooting for it.
Midwest: I think the S16’s most compelling matchups are both in the Midwest. The Zags can throw four bodies (Ike, Watson, Greggs, Huff) with a mix of size and athleticism at Zach Edey. The Edey vs Ike foul count might be the biggest determinant in the game. Creighton-Tennessee could be anything from a run-n-gun shootout to a rock fight, but I think it’ll be special regardless of the makeup.
South: Houston and Marquette have been tested, Duke is talented and shooting well, and NC State is the closest thing to a Cinderella in the tournament. But I expect Houston and Marquette’s physicality to lead to a heavy-weight fight in the Elite 8.
I was lucky enough to attend the UNC-Michigan State and Tennessee-Texas games in Charlotte, which helped with the TV exhaustion
Not that anyone cares, but my bracket is in the 92nd percentile, which is maybe my best ever performance
Oregon’s N’Faly Dante and Baylor’s Ja’Kobe Walter missed crucial free throws, and Wade Taylor IV badly missed on some logo 3s, but those were the only notable misses.